Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Oracle vs Sybase: What are the differences?
Oracle vs Sybase
Oracle and Sybase are both popular relational database management systems (RDBMS) used in enterprise environments. While they share some similarities, there are key differences between the two.
Architecture: Oracle uses a multithreaded server architecture, allowing multiple threads to handle different tasks concurrently. On the other hand, Sybase uses a multiengine architecture, where each engine is responsible for handling a specific task such as processing queries or managing connections.
Data Replication: Oracle offers advanced data replication capabilities, including various methods such as physical, logical, and snapshot replication. Sybase, on the other hand, provides simpler replication options such as warm standby replication and synchronous replication.
Data Encryption: Oracle offers transparent data encryption (TDE), which allows for data encryption at the tablespace level. It ensures that data at rest is securely protected. Sybase does not offer a built-in transparent encryption feature like TDE, requiring additional third-party tools for data encryption.
Partitioning: Oracle provides a range of partitioning options to enhance query performance and manage large data sets. These include range, list, composite, and interval partitioning methods. Sybase offers limited partitioning capabilities, primarily through manual table splitting or using third-party extensions.
Data Types: Oracle has a broader range of built-in data types compared to Sybase. This includes support for a variety of spatial, XML, and multimedia data types. Sybase, while offering the essential data types, may require additional customization or extensions for specific data storage requirements.
Backup and Recovery: Oracle provides comprehensive backup and recovery tools, such as Recovery Manager (RMAN), to perform backups, restore data, and recover from failures. Sybase also offers backup and recovery mechanisms but with fewer options compared to Oracle's extensive toolset.
In summary, Oracle offers a more robust architecture, advanced data replication capabilities, transparent data encryption, enhanced partitioning options, a broader range of built-in data types, and comprehensive backup and recovery tools compared to Sybase. However, Sybase may still be suitable for simpler environments where advanced features are not required.
We have chosen Tibero over Oracle because we want to offer a PL/SQL-as-a-Service that the users can deploy in any Cloud without concerns from our website at some standard cost. With Oracle Database, developers would have to worry about what they implement and the related costs of each feature but the licensing model from Tibero is just 1 price and we have all features included, so we don't have to worry and developers using our SQLaaS neither. PostgreSQL would be open source. We have chosen Tibero over Oracle because we want to offer a PL/SQL that you can deploy in any Cloud without concerns. PostgreSQL would be the open source option but we need to offer an SQLaaS with encryption and more enterprise features in the background and best value option we have found, it was Tibero Database for PL/SQL-based applications.
We wanted a JSON datastore that could save the state of our bioinformatics visualizations without destructive normalization. As a leading NoSQL data storage technology, MongoDB has been a perfect fit for our needs. Plus it's open source, and has an enterprise SLA scale-out path, with support of hosted solutions like Atlas. Mongo has been an absolute champ. So much so that SQL and Oracle have begun shipping JSON column types as a new feature for their databases. And when Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) announced support for JSON, we basically had our FHIR datalake technology.
In the field of bioinformatics, we regularly work with hierarchical and unstructured document data. Unstructured text data from PDFs, image data from radiographs, phylogenetic trees and cladograms, network graphs, streaming ECG data... none of it fits into a traditional SQL database particularly well. As such, we prefer to use document oriented databases.
MongoDB is probably the oldest component in our stack besides Javascript, having been in it for over 5 years. At the time, we were looking for a technology that could simply cache our data visualization state (stored in JSON) in a database as-is without any destructive normalization. MongoDB was the perfect tool; and has been exceeding expectations ever since.
Trivia fact: some of the earliest electronic medical records (EMRs) used a document oriented database called MUMPS as early as the 1960s, prior to the invention of SQL. MUMPS is still in use today in systems like Epic and VistA, and stores upwards of 40% of all medical records at hospitals. So, we saw MongoDB as something as a 21st century version of the MUMPS database.
Pros of Oracle
- Reliable44
- Enterprise33
- High Availability15
- Hard to maintain5
- Expensive5
- Maintainable4
- Hard to use4
- High complexity3
Pros of Sybase
- Sybase has at least 200000 from 15 years ago1
- Verry fast queries response1
- SAP Replication server este net superior replicarii din1
- Configurable with 2k,4k,8k,16k,32k data pages1
- Very good for application with high number of connectio1
- Replication server the best1
- HADR dont loose data1
- Max number of connection is 3500001
- HADR does not lose data is superior to Allwayson which1
- SAP Replication server is clearly superior to MS SQL Se1
- Multiple pools pools0
- Multiple buffer pools0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Oracle
- Expensive14